On 02/24/2014 09:43 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Mon, 24 Feb 2014 09:15:29 -0800
Ethan Furman <et...@stoneleaf.us> wrote:
On 02/23/2014 02:54 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
It's a harm containment tactic, based on the assumption people *will*
want to include the output of ascii() in binary protocols containing
ASCII segments, regardless of whether or not we consider their reasons
for doing so to be particularly good.
One possible problem with %a -- it becomes the bytes equivalent of %s in Python
2 strings, with the minor exception of
how unicode strings are handled (quote marks are added). In other words,
instead of %d, one could use %a.
On the other hand, %a is so much more user-friendly than b'%s' % ('%d' %
123).encode('ascii', errors='backslashreplace').
But why not b'%d' % 123 ?
I was just using 123 as an example of the user-unfriendliness of the rest of
that line.
--
~Ethan~
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
